 |
There are currently, 257 guest(s) and 0 member(s) that are online.
You are Anonymous user. You can register for free by clicking here
| |
| |
An Alternative to the Administration's Attack on Kyoto
Posted on Tuesday, December 02, 2003 @ 20:15:24 UTC by vlad
|
|
Overtone writes: Yesterday, the U.S. Undersecretary of State for Global Affairs attacked the Kyoto Accord, stating that: “Only new technology can halt climate change”. However, all of the specific technologies the Administration supports will take decades to make an effective contribution to a reduction in greenhouse gases.
The approach is top down, and will therefore inevitably be slowed to a crawl by mammoth organizations, where breakthroughs are likely to propagate too slowly to avoid what may already be en-route to becoming catastrophic changes in climate.
The missing alternative is adequate early stage financial support for individual inventors and small firms. Our neighbor to the North has shown one promising solution by creating a remarkable funding agency: Sustainable Technology Development Canada, (see www.sdtc.ca). Inventors and companies can partner with Canadian organizations, to receive timely funding on generous terms. This is a relatively new, quite unusual organization. It is designed to stimulate the presently lacking, and urgently needed, seed capital private investment -- from the bottom up.
It would seem worthy of rapidly imitation in every country, (and large states such as California), that is genuinely concerned with the problems of accelerating the commercialization of promising, ground-breaking, alternatives to the fossil fuels.
Of course, Angel investors can support deserving work directly and without delay.
Magnetic Power Inc. is currently testing generators that show promise of becoming cost-effective and fuel-free. Apparently, a handful of other firms and laboratories are achieving promising results as well. All appear to be struggling to obtain an adequate minimum level of funding.
Perhaps, with modest, but sufficient, support, 2004 will herald the dawn of an age that can provide practical technology, capable of superseding the need for fossil or uranium fuels.
|
| |
|
Don't have an account yet? You can create one. As a registered user you have some advantages like theme manager, comments configuration and post comments with your name.
| |
Average Score: 1
Votes: 1
| |
|
|
No Comments Allowed for Anonymous, please register |
|
National Style (Score: 1)
by vlad on Tuesday, December 02, 2003 @ 20:44:28 UTC
(User Info | Send a Message) http://www.zpenergy.com | Here is a recent letter Tom Bearden sent to Leslie Pastor on the new energy funding subject (and published on the intalek yahoo group):
----------------
Leslie,
Yes, the real problem in the vacuum energy field right now is the near-total lack of funding.
Somehow we must find a way to fund certain selected inventors and researchers, and to fund some sharp young graduate students and post-docs in the universities to do hard research in this area.
The problem is that one is expected to have done several million dollars of "engineering development", all the way to the pre-production stage, before one is deemed worthy of funding by the "venture capitalist" financial groups. It is precisely that intermediate step between having a little working nonlinear model on the bench, and having a fully developed robust power system model capable of powering homes and offices, that is the rub.
Most folks (even in the so-called "overunity community") think it's just normal electrical engineering. It isn't. If it could be done by ordinary electrical engineering, those hundreds of thousands of sharp graduates our universities have produced worldwide would have done it long ago.
There is no handbook or even a listing of the phenomenology of overunity EM systems taking their energy from the vacuum. We are slowly filling the gap on a good deal of that, but it's a very slow and painful process. That's really why the sharp young graduates and their research in the universities is so desperately needed.
So the transition research from little working models that are a bit cantankerous and highly nonlinear, to full bore robust models with all phenomenology worked out and modeled in an engineering model in higher group symmetry EM, is the rub. There is no funding available to do that.
In our own case, with such funding we are from one to two years away from the "robust, modeled generator" ready to be production engineered for mass production. And that is quite a few million dollars worth of "gap".
Several other inventors also are in the same boat, having successful processes but still not having completely tamed the phenomenology, nor been able to produced an engineering model.
Then of course there is the suppression factor, if one does somehow start to get into that "robust unit ready for production engineering" area. While sometimes the inventor "meets with a sudden suicide or heart attack on the way to the supermarket", these days the suppression is more subtly done by "gaming" (we've explained that term and methodology previously).
So assessing everything, it probably is not going to happen until (1) the nation is desperately in need for it, and probably even then not till terrorists lay the distribution grids in the dust, (2) wars or international realignments cut off much of our supply of oil and natural gas, (3) the National Academy of Sciences, the National Science Foundation, the Department of Energy, the universities, and the National Laboratories wake up to the reality of energy from the vacuum.
You see, when one does a military "Strategic Analysis" on a nation, one of the areas is called "National Style". That is basically a detailed analysis of how the cultural and national reactions occur or do not occur, and with a good analysis one can even "predict" those reactions with some degree of success.
In our own case, our National Style has some grave vulnerabilities. One of the major ones is that we do not react to a slowly increasing threat. We react to the rattlesnake after it bites, but not to the boa constrictor slowly squeezing us tighter.
In the slowly increasing energy crisis, this means we will almost certainly not change until we get "bitten" and bitten hard.
The scientific community is not going to change, and neither are the government labs, until the citizenry are so enraged at them that political heads are beginning to roll.
That's the situation we face, and probably what it will take: a dire emergency that we cannot solve or get out of.
In short, it's going to take another Pearl Harbor or 9/11 before the nation, the scientists, the political leaders, and the enviromentalists wake up and get their heads out of the sand. Cheap CLEAN electrical energy from the vacuum can be had within 3 years, anytime the suppressing and opposing parties change their tune and get with the program, and the funding for the research and establishing the research are set up.
For a real eyeopener, just look at the latest "big project" the Department of Energy has decided upon. You'll see that Big Nuclear projects have the lead, and there is not a single major project concerned with extraction of EM energy from the vacuum.
Best wishes,
Tom Bearden
|
|
|
|
|
